Prospect Magazine App             Subscribe to Prospect

Prospect Magazine

Blog RSS

First Drafts

The dangers of terrorism denial

by
/ / 4 Comments

The Houses of Parliament is thought to be one possible target of terrorist suspects arrested yesterday

Yesterday’s arrests over an alleged Christmas ‘bomb plot’ remind us that al Qaeda-inspired terrorism remains a dangerous threat, both in Britain and abroad. It was no surprise to hear that Taimour Abdulwahab al-Abdaly, the Swedish suicide bomber, may have been radicalised during his time in Britain. This country is one of the biggest exporters of Islamist violence. Yet prominent politicians, community leaders and activists obfuscate the problem. “If it wasn’t for Bush and Blair’s illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, then people wouldn’t want to kill us,” so the cliché goes.

Some believe that Western governments deliberately exaggerate or even invent terror plots as part of a grand scheme to discredit Muslims. For example, British journalist Fiona Bawdon and jury foreman Lawrence Archer recently wrote an exposé of the trial of Kamal Bourgass—the man

You need to be logged in to see this part of the content. Please Login to access.
  1. December 21, 2010

    BenSix

    Ms Ahmed claims that Bawdon and Archer write that the British state “exaggerated the threat posed by Bourgass” and groups that view amongst beliefs that are “problem[atic]“. Bawdon and Archer were, of course, absolutely right: governmental studies found no toxins yet the media proclaimed there was a “factory of death”. Colin Powell used it to justify belief in an “Iraq-linked terrorist network”. Ahmed challenges none of this, despite it giving fine cause to believe that (a) “Western governments deliberately exaggerate [the threat]” and (b) this poses dangers that are well worth studying. Clearly denial isn’t limited to Ahmed’s purported targets.

     
  2. December 22, 2010

    Abbas

    Dear houriyah Ahmed,

    I agree with much of what you have said. Namely that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are causal and that those who seek to attack the west will do so even in the absence of any such wars. However, what do you mean by the term ‘Islamist fascists’? Do you mean that we as Muslims should agree with homosexuality and accept an ethnocentric view of the world? Or do you mean that they (the Islamic fascists) are terrorist with no regards for human life, peace, and order?
    “No matter how much the West tries to appease Muslim communities and Muslim-majority countries, Islamist fascists will always believe that the West is against Islam and Muslims worldwide.”
    Actually terrorism is just as much a threat in “Muslim-majority countries” as it is in the west.
    http://www.islamagainstextremism.com/

    “The very essence of this ideology seeks to impose totalitarianism wherever it can, and mass murder is just a by-product.”

    This statement is a rather sweeping and shows that you are opposed to Islam as it does not conform to your cultural norms and values. Perhaps you should consider that there are people out there who seek to live according to Islamic principles (even without democracy I might add) and that they want to do so. Perhaps it is you who seeks to impose his ideology on others. As for the mass-murdering then this not a by-product but rather it is based on a deviant methodology which is clarified in the link below.
    http://www.takfiris.com/takfir/

    Additionaly people like and Anjum Choudry should be arrested and should not be given a platform from which to speak. If you were to ask a learned Islamic scholar from Saudi Arabia such as the Grand Mufti you would find him condemn the likes of Anjum Choudry and Omar Bakri in the strongest terms. In fact if they were in Saudi they would have been arrested a long time ago.

    Regards,

    Muhammed Abbas Khan

     
  3. December 23, 2010

    Cesar Augusto Castro

    It is said that, according to a 2007 Channel 4 poll, 1/4 of Muslims in the UK believed that 7/7 was staged…O.K., and what about the other 3/4?

     
  4. January 6, 2011

    Iftikhar Ahmad

    Salaam

    Tolerance in Britain is an illusion.

    Everybody should live together and love each other like the brothers and sisters they are. Stop this artificial human division, which all it does is create wars and wars and wars. Nature has already made enough variety of human beings: many different skin, eye and hair colours, different types of hair, from very small to very tall people, an infinite gamut of degress of intelligence, etc, etc. That’s enough variety.

    The problem isn’t Muslims not adapting to British culture, it’s Brits showing much disrespect and scorn to those who are of any Islamic background. even if an Muslim was well versed in English, knew the customs etc. would they still get employment? No. Would Brits treat them as a decent human? No.
    So why would they want to integrate into a culture that is constantly tearing them down?

    God doesn’t want the whole world to be Muslim but that the duty of Muslims, Jews and Christians is to compete in doing good works to please him. Unfortunately, we all seem to be killing each other instead. May it soon change!

    There is no end to act of terrorism, forced marriages and honour killing, as long as Muslim children keep on attending state schools with monolingual non-Muslim teachers. Bilingual Muslim children need state funded Muslim schools with bilingual
    Muslim teachers as role models during their developmental periods. There is no place for a non-Muslim child or a teacher in a Muslim school. There are hundreds of stat and church schools where Muslim children are in majority. In my opinion, all such schools may be opted out as Muslim Academies.
    Iftikhar Ahmad

     

Leave a comment

Share

Print Friendly and PDF







Popular Articles



Author

Houriya Ahmed

http://www.socialcohesion.co.uk
Houriya Ahmed is a research fellow at the Centre for Social Cohesion.